Subject: bug#24774: 26.0.50; Menu display navigation commands

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:27:58 +0200

> From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [email-masked],  [email-masked],  [email-masked]
> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 13:07:34 +0100
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
> > maybe it's a reason good enough not to use easymenu in elisp-mode.el?
> > Why do we want to do that, again?
> 
> Because it's a better, more sensible way to define menus.

But the same argument can be brought up for cl-macs.el and cl-lib.el
and seq.el and map.el and pcase.el and probably several others.  Where
do we stop, if the criterion is "better and more sensible" (which are
highly subjective judgments)?

Or are you saying that memory footprint considerations are totally
unimportant, and we should preload everything that might possibly be
helpful?

That's why I suggested to discuss and agree on the criteria first.  If
we don't agree on some criteria, we will have this argument many times
in the future.

> (And possibly smaller .elc file, as I said.)

I'd like to see the actual numbers, please.  And also the memory
footprint before and after loading easymenu.  With the current code, I
see a 0.25MB increase in the VM size after I load easymenu.elc.